Delhi High Court High Court

Smt. Parvati Devi Mehta & Ors. vs Suresh Kumar & Ors. on 31 March, 2009

Delhi High Court
Smt. Parvati Devi Mehta & Ors. vs Suresh Kumar & Ors. on 31 March, 2009
Author: J.R. Midha
*        IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                      FAO No.419/2000

                           Date of reserve: 5th February, 2009
%                          Date of decision: 31st March, 2009

SMT. PARVATI DEVI MEHTA & ORS.         ..... Appellants
                   Through: Mr. O.P. Mainee, Adv.
                   versus
SURESH KUMAR & ORS.                    ..... Respondents
                   Through: Mr. Kamal Deep, Adv. for R-2.
CORAM :-
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA

1.       Whether Reporters of Local papers may
         be allowed to see the Judgment?

2.       To be referred to the Reporter or not?

3.       Whether the judgment should be
         reported in the Digest?


                             JUDGMENT

1. The appellants have challenged the award of the learned

Tribunal whereby compensation of Rs.2,64,000/- has been

awarded to the appellants. The appellants are seeking

enhancement of the award amount.

2. On 12th August, 1988, the deceased Nathu Singh was

walking on Shantipath when he was hit by TCR bearing No.DBR-

3923 driven rashly and negligently by its driver. The deceased

suffered fatal injuries resulting in his death.

3. The deceased was survived by his wife, three daughters

and three sons who filed the claim petition before the learned

Tribunal.

FAO No.419/2000 Page 1 of 6

4. The deceased was aged 54 years at the time of the

accident and was holding the post of ACIO-II in Intelligence

Bureau, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, drawing

a salary of Rs.2937/- per month.

5. The learned Tribunal has awarded compensation of

Rs.2,64,000/- by taking monthly income of the deceased at

Rs.3,000/-. 1/3 of the income has been deducted towards

personal expenses of the deceased and the dependency of the

appellants has been taken at Rs.2,000/- on which multiplier of

11 has been applied to compute the total compensation at

Rs.2,64,000/-.

6. The appellants have urged the following grounds to

challenge the impugned award:-

(i) The future prospects have not been taken into

consideration while computing the income of the

deceased.

(ii) The personal expenses of the deceased be deducted

at 1/8 instead of 1/3 of the income considering that

the deceased left behind seven legal representatives.

(iii) The compensation be awarded for loss of consortium,

love, affection and funeral expenses.

7. The learned counsel for the appellants submit that the

future prospects be considered by taking the average of the

income and its double as per the principle laid down by the Apex

FAO No.419/2000 Page 2 of 6
Court in the case of Sarla Dixit Vs. Balwant Yadav – 1996 SC

1274. The deceased was aged 54 years at the time of the

accident. Considering the age of the deceased, the income of

the deceased could not have doubled during the remaining

service of the deceased. However, the income of the deceased

would have increased from Rs.2,937/- to Rs.4,500/- due to

regular increments. It is, therefore, appropriate to take the

average of Rs.2,937/- and Rs.4,500/- which comes to

Rs.3,718.50 per month (rounded off as Rs.3,720/-).

8. With respect to the personal expenses of the deceased,

the learned Tribunal has deducted 1/3 from the income of the

deceased. The deduction of 1/3 towards personal expenses of

the deceased is not a thumb rule. The deduction depends upon

the number of legal representatives. In Surinder Kaur Vs.

Inder Kapoor, II (2004) ACC 866, this Court has allowed the

deduction of personal expenses of the deceased at 2/11

considering that the deceased left behind his widow, three

children and parents. In the present case, the deceased left

behind seven legal representatives namely his wife, three sons

and three daughters. One daughter was married at the time of

the accident and two daughters were minor. Two sons were

minor whereas one son was above 18 years of age at the time of

the accident. Therefore, the deduction of 1/5 of the income

towards the personal expenses of the deceased is appropriate in

the present case. The annual dependency of the legal

representatives of the deceased comes to Rs.35,712/- (3,720/- x

FAO No.419/2000 Page 3 of 6
4/5th x 12). The multiplier of 11 applied by learned Tribunal is

upheld. The total loss of dependency of the appellants is

computed at Rs.3,92,832/- (Rs.35,712/- x 11).

9. The learned Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards

non-pecuniary damages. In the case of Mohinder Kaur Vs.

Hiranand Sindhi, 2007 ACJ 2123, the Apex Court upheld the

interest of 9% on award of Rs.50,000/- for loss of consortium in

relation to an accident of 1982. In the case of United India

Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sulochana – III (2007) ACC 50 (DB),

the Madras High Court has awarded Rs.50,000/- towards loss of

consortium and Rs.50,000/- towards love and affection. In the

case of New India Assurance Co. ltd. Vs. Amresh Kumar –

2005 ACJ 538, this Court awarded Rs.50,000/- towards loss of

consortium. Following the above judgments, I hereby award

Rs.50,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs.7,500/- to each of

the appellant towards loss of love and affection and loss of

estate.

10. The total compensation is computed at Rs.4,95,332/-

(Rs.3,92,832/- + Rs.50,000/- + Rs.7,500/- x 7).

11. The learned Tribunal has awarded interest @ 10% per

annum for the period from 20th May, 1993 upto the date of the

award which is not being interfered. However, for period after

the date of award upto the payment, the rate of interest shall be

7.5% in terms of the judgment of the Apex Court in case of

Dharampal Vs. U.P. State Road Transport Corporation, III

FAO No.419/2000 Page 4 of 6
2008 ACC 1 SCC. No interest has been awarded by the

learned Tribunal from the date of filing of the petition till 20 th

May, 1993 on the ground that serious efforts were not made by

the appellants to serve the respondents but it cannot be lost

sight of that the compensation to the appellants became

payable immediately on the death of the deceased and the

Insurance Company continued to retain the money. No steps

were taken by the Insurance Company to come forward and

offer the compensation. Considering the facts and

circumstances of this case, interest at the rate of 5% per annum

w.e.f. the filing of the petition i.e. 1st February, 1989 upto 20th

May, 1993 would serve the interest of Justice.

12. The appeal is allowed and the award amount is enhanced

from Rs.2,64,000/- to Rs.4,95,332/- along with interest @ 5% per

annum from the date of filing of the petition upto 20th May,

1993, interest at the rate of 10% per annum w.e.f. 20 th May,

1993 upto the date of award of the learned Tribunal and at the

rate of 7.5% from the date of award till realization.

13. The share of the appellants in the enhanced amount and

interest thereon shall be as under:-

        Appellant No.1.            -    70%
        Appellants No.2 to 7       -    5% each


14. The enhanced amount along with interest be deposited by

the respondent with the learned Tribunal within 30 days. The

learned Tribunal is directed to release 30% of the share of

FAO No.419/2000 Page 5 of 6
appellant No.1 to her and remaining 70% of the amount be kept

in a fixed deposit for a period of ten years on which no loan,

advance or withdrawal be permitted without the prior

permission of the learned Tribunal but the periodical interest be

permitted be released to appellant No.1. With respect to shares

of appellants No.2 to 7, 50% of their share be released to them

and remaining 50% of their share be kept in fixed deposit for a

period of five years with restriction on withdrawal, loan and

advance as above in the case of appellant No.1. The learned

Tribunal shall first release the cheques towards the amount has

to be kept in fixed deposits and the remaining amount be

released only after the original fixed deposit receipts with proper

endorsements are shown to the learned Tribunal and the copies

of FDRs duly attested by the Bank are placed on record of the

learned Tribunal.

J.R. MIDHA, J
March 31, 2009
s.pal

FAO No.419/2000 Page 6 of 6